In re Cook’s Empirical Analysis
551 F.3d 542 · 2009
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently August 2023
5 federal appellate ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 170 · 28 U.S.C. § 1257 · 42 U.S.C. § 1396P (§ 1917 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman · Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co. · Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp. · In the Matter of John Ruffalo Jr · Theard v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“federal courts should proceed on the presumption that federal courts [“should recognize the condition created by the judgment of the state court”] unless certain factors are present including: 1. That the state procedure from want of notice or opportunity to be heard was wanting in due process; 2, that there was such an infirmity of proof as to facts found to have established the want of fair private and professional character as to give rise to a clear conviction on our part that we could not consistently with our duty accept as final the conclusion on that subject; or 3, that some other grave reason existed which should convince us that to allow the natural consequences of the judgment to have their effect would conflict with the duty which rests upon us not to disbar except upon the conviction that, under the principles of right and justice, we were constrained so to do.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. In re Squire“The Rooker - Feldman doctrine embodies the notion that appellate review of state-court decisions and the validity of state judicial proceedings is limited to the Supreme Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1257 , and thus that federal district courts lack jurisdiction to review such matters.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Rooker - Feldman doctrine is based on the negative inference that, if appellate court review of such state judgments is vested in the Supreme Court, then it follows that such review may not be had in the lower federal courts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.